search for: noncommittal

...n Github than trying to reference > code blocks in llvm-commits email. At this point we really don't know > if one solution is better than the other, but we have good reason to > believe Pull Requests might be a big win. So rather than all the > talk, can we baby-step forward in a noncommittal way? > > How about allowing the code owner to add a line to CODE_OWNERS.TXT of > the location to submit patches? If no location is given, assume > llvm-commits. If the URI is a Github spork, the contributor should > make a Pull Request. This isn't viable; Github pull requests...

...comment on a patch on Github than trying to reference code blocks in llvm-commits email. At this point we really don't know if one solution is better than the other, but we have good reason to believe Pull Requests might be a big win. So rather than all the talk, can we baby-step forward in a noncommittal way? How about allowing the code owner to add a line to CODE_OWNERS.TXT of the location to submit patches? If no location is given, assume llvm-commits. If the URI is a Github spork, the contributor should make a Pull Request. Thanks, Greg On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 3:50 PM, <dag at cray.com&...

Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> writes: >> - I have to *remember* I submitted the patch (not hard, but it is a >> cost). > > If you forgot, the chances are high that the patch was unimportant. I > do my development on local git branches, so every time I do `git > branch`, I'm reminded. There's really no overhead. Every time you have to check it's

...ying to reference >> code blocks in llvm-commits email. At this point we really don't know >> if one solution is better than the other, but we have good reason to >> believe Pull Requests might be a big win. So rather than all the >> talk, can we baby-step forward in a noncommittal way? >> >> How about allowing the code owner to add a line to CODE_OWNERS.TXT of >> the location to submit patches? If no location is given, assume >> llvm-commits. If the URI is a Github spork, the contributor should >> make a Pull Request. > > This isn't...